Unions, business and farm groups joined Monday in support of a proposed northern Minnesota crude oil pipeline, while environmental and climate activists told regulators the project is a mistake.
Minnesotans' divided sentiments about pipelines surfaced at the first of five public hearings this week on the proposed Sandpiper project. The hearing at St. Paul RiverCentre drew more than 300 people.
The $2.6 billion, 610-mile pipeline would deliver North Dakota crude oil to Superior, Wis., where other pipelines already feed refineries in the Midwest and East. It is one of two pipelines that Calgary-based Enbridge Energy is planning across northern Minnesota.
When signing in at the hearing, participants had to declare their views, and more than 130 people indicated they favored the project. Slightly fewer said they opposed it. About three dozen people testified before an early evening break.
"We have a fossil fuel monkey on our backs and we are being offered another fix," said Jerry Striegel of St. Paul, echoing the views of others who spoke of the threat of climate change if the world doesn't reduce its reliance on fossil fuels.
But unions representing thousands of workers who would get the construction jobs said the oil bounty from North Dakota helps U.S. energy security and much of it already crosses Minnesota on oil trains. Pipelines, they said, can be built and operated safely.
"These members need to have this work," said David LaBorde, Teamsters International pipeline director, one of several union officials to speak in favor of the project. "In northern Minnesota, we have a significant problem in getting good-paying jobs."
Unions have emerged as vocal advocates of the project, especially the Teamsters, Laborers and Pipeliners unions, which have offered estimates of up to 3,000 short-term jobs. Unions are allied not only with the oil industry, but with farm and business groups, including the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce, which also testified in support of the project.